Iran took another step in its plans to eradicate Western influence from its Internet, with the weekend launch of its very own, government-sanctioned, censored and monitored video-sharing site, called Mehr.
The site – its name means “affection” in Farsi, according to Agence France Presse – is intended to give Iranians video …

Re: Holy cow...

"Iran’s censorship of the Internet, most particularly targeting platforms like Facebook, Twitter, pornography and Western media, has brought... in the case of America, sanctions against the country."

Yeah, we were totally fine with the threats to destroy our allies, violent oppression of political resistance, support of terrorism, and continual attempts to create nuclear weapons. But block Twitter? Oh, man - then it's on.

"Yeah, we were totally fine with the threats to destroy our allies, violent oppression of political resistance, support of terrorism, and continual attempts to create nuclear weapons. But block Twitter? Oh, man - then it's on."

Actually, none of the sanctions are for " threats to destroy our allies, violent oppression of political resistance, support of terrorism", they're only for the "attempts to create nuclear weapons" bit.

I'm still not sure whether imlying Internet censorship was the cause of the sanctions was an oversight / blunder or a fairly typical el Reg tongue-in-cheek pisstake.

@AC 07:35 GMT

"Even American generals have stated they don't believe Iran is trying to make nukes"

Source yourself, please?

Iran is known to (and admits) enreching uranium. They say it's for peaceful reactors BUT they refuse to have anyone take a peek, AND they rejected a very sensible offer to get their uranium enriched in Europe and Russia at no cost, as long as the IAEA would be allowed to ensure it's only used for power stations. If they REALLY are ONLY interested in peaceful applications of nuclear tech, they would have jumped on that offer.

On the other hand, to be fair, their perceived regional rival DOES have nukes even though they don't publicly admit it, so having nukes as a deterrent rather than as an offensive weapon makes sense. And their supreme Ayatollah has publicly declared that using nukes as an offensive weapon is a sin.

Re: @AC 07:35 GMT

OK, Tom - where would you rather live, the 'right wing theocracy' of Tel Aviv, or the right wing theocracy of Tehran? I've been to the beach in Tel Aviv, and I can tell you first hand that (a) Hasidic Jews have nooo sway over womens' garb there and (b) The bar scene in Iran is almost certainly not as hot.

Israel doesn't threaten to level Tehran - Israel says it's prepared to use whatever means necessary to prevent Iran (which has vowed multiple time to destroy Israel for no reason in particular (actually, no - it's because Israel is full of Jews), and whose current president frequently launches into antisemitic screeds and denies the holocaust) from acquiring nuclear weapons.

Israel has very little motivation - read "none whatsoever" - to out-of-the-blue attack Iran just for the hell of it. They're tiny and surrounded by countries that would love nothing more than to, as they say, 'push them into the sea'.

Suggesting that defense against Israel is a good reason for Iran to have nukes is absolutely absurd.

When the the whole football team is threatening constantly to kill the tiny class nerd and he gets a baseball bat, do you advocate that the 300lb lineman get a bat also to 'protect himself' from an unprovoked attack? Seriously?

And do you really subscribe to moral equivalence between Israel, the US, and Iran? Here's a hint: Two of those countries allow you to air your grievances about their governments, look at any web site you want, play whatever music you want, run for office freely, and, well, be Jewish. Do you know which ones they are?

Re: @AC 07:35 GMT

Suggesting that defense against Israel is a good reason for Iran to have nukes is absolutely absurd.

Israel refuses to admit it even has nukes, and if it did admit it had them, it would not give them up as it sees them as a last defence against Iran. See how that argument works?

Israel has very little motivation - read "none whatsoever" - to out-of-the-blue attack Iran just for the hell of it.

Really? It didn't take much motivation for Israel to out of the blue attack Syria over perceived nuclear ambitions.

PM Netanyahu stated just 3 months ago that he has "red lines" over Iranian nuclear development, at which point risk for Israel is "intolerable". Netanyahu and Barak have been reported by the former heads of Shin Bet and Mossad as having "belligerent" and "messianic" impulses over Iran.

When the the whole football team is threatening constantly to kill the tiny class nerd and he gets a baseball bat, do you advocate that the 300lb lineman get a bat also to 'protect himself' from an unprovoked attack? Seriously?

To clarify, Israel and the US are the tiny class nerd, and Iran is the 300lb lineman? Some mistake surely? Military spending (2009): US: $663bn Saudi Arabia: $33bn Israel: $13bn Iran: 9bn (note some of US military spending is aid to Israel).

do you really subscribe to moral equivalence between Israel, the US, and Iran

Yes, pretty much actually.

I think the State of Israel is the 21st Century's Third Reich. Its degrading treatment of it's citizens, whose only crime is to be Muslim, is shocking. The conditions in Gaza are truly repugnant. The only similar situation to Gaza in the last century was the Warsaw Ghetto. That a people on which so much horror was foisted can so quickly be doing the foisting themselves is an irony of the human condition.

Iran is a rabid theocracy, with very few freedoms for it's people, I wouldn't like to live there.

The US is morally bankrupt. The poor starve whilst the rich live out their gilded lives. I've been all over the world, and I've never seen so many people eating out of bins as I saw in three weeks in Chicago.

Half the nation thinks that paying for healthcare for the less fortunate is somehow "wrong", whilst they spend more on military spending than anyone else in the world, so that they can promote their democracy and value system around the world by projecting military force.

Two of these countries have nukes, and you're a liar if you've never heard the expression "turn Tehran into a parking lot". In the current scenario, at some point - any point - Netanyahu may decide he's had enough, and nuke Tehran. Israel would be condemned, but Iran would not be able to respond back in any meaningful way. With both sides having nukes, that equation changes such that neither side has a reason to use them.

Site now up

Media meddling again

I seem to remember that there are a lot of clever hackers/programmers in Iran. I presume it won't take them long to create the appropriate tunnels/routing etc which will allow then access whatever they want.

I have worked with many Iranians and I think many of you would be surprised at just how "Non Backward" that country can be, "sometimes".

The media present us with an image that is really "not very concise". I also lived in Israel and remember how bad foreign media presented that country too.

Be very carefull about what you are seeing/reading. The awakening can be very rude indeed.

I can't imagine for a moment that El Reg has many reporters there, so like everyone else they use "second/third/fourth hand reports" from which they add a little of their own sauce in order to make "interesting" articles.....

sanctions

"Iran’s censorship of the Internet, most particularly targeting platforms like Facebook, Twitter, pornography and Western media, has brought both criticism and, in the case of America, sanctions against the country"

Yeah, that's exactly why sanctions are being placed on Iran (by most of the countries in the World not just the US). Not that they're trying to build nuclear weapons, or anything trivial like that.

Because while the rest of the world develops the dictators trying to shut out "foreign influence" will see economic and reality gaps grow to such proportions the state will get torn down by its own people.

Like North Korea, you mean? Yes, *you'll* be OK (and so will I) but I think you should spare a thought for several million of your fellow human beings who were born into the hell-hole that is "a dictator trying to shut out foreign influence". Roughly 1% of the world's population live in Iran. Given the nature of the place, even *those* aren't good odds.

The more I read about this, the more I shudder. Oppressive governments (and the majority are just that - http://www.dkosopedia.com/wiki/Dictators_and_Non-Democratic_Governments) keeping their people ignorant through censorship and the placement of dogma over knowledge. The Catholic church went through the same thing in the dark ages and luckily, we emerged on the other side of that.

There should be a universal declaration of freedoms for all the peoples of Earth. Free speech and the right to access information should be sacrosanct. Honestly, if your society or government cannot survive exposure to another, then it is destined to die.

Unfortunately, ignorance and power mad individuals will always try to circumvent this. That is why governments should serve their citizens and not themselves. Political parties should be eliminated with politicians representing their constituents. The police should have access to personal and private information with a court order, but privacy should be another right with strict court controls over who gets access to that information. No mass surveillance, no government recording of everything that is said or videoed before a crime is actually committed. This idiocy has to end.